Guns N' Roses

[ShockTK]

And if my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle.

[sampuds]

I find it hilarious that all the QOTSA fans are calling GNR are tribute band because only Axl is left....

1.) i swear QOTSA only have homme who was orginally in the line up? if not i'm sorry

2.) people are forgetting one of the most important (i think) members of GNR, Dizzy Reed, who is STILL in the band.

3.) Incase you didnt know, Slash wouldnt have been able to play like he did if he didnt have Izzy by his side with his amazing rhythm

4.) Richard Fortus is god, cant wait for him to play his james bond solo

to sum up, Guns N' Roses are going to blow everyone away.

[rexclark]

4.) Richard Fortus is god, cant wait for him to play his james bond solo

[mrtourette]

Oh no! Sarcasm!

Although I do remember reading an interview where Kurt Cobain said he was in the back of a car listening to music and asked to see the tape, and one side it had Black Flag and the other had Celtic Frost. Somehow I don't think Guns n Roses listened to Celtic Frost. The misery of Seattle may have also helped. Incidentially, Duff McKagen was one of the last people to see Kurt Cobain alive.

LA is different to Seattle. There's another perceptive and obvious fact for you, Batman.

Edited March 30, 2010 by mrtourette

[sampuds]

Not as good as Bucketheads Star Wars theme.

[ShockTK]

It's not sarcasm, my point is that despite the comparisons made between the troubled childhoods and influences the two bands are poles apart in their attitudes. Sure one band coming out of LA in the early 80's and one out of Seattle in the late 80's would have something to do with it but you can make that tenuous link between any two bands.

[Dave The Owl]

Interesting how people have such entrenched opinions about a performance that hasn't happened yet!! In my opinion both GnR and The Libertines have the potential to be legendary sets, and whether thats for good or bad reasons we won't know until the end of August!!

I'm not a great believer in the "if its not the original line up it's not real" view - I saw Suede twice last week and they were brilliant, despite there being no Bernard Butler.

As for GnR, I've seen them 3 times - the Use Your Illusion tour (91? 92?), at Leeds in 2002 and at Wembley in 2006. Three different lead guitarists, three stunningly good shows in my opinion. I'm no musical expert but I'd seriously doubt how many of the 85,000 people standing in a field at either Leeds or Reading would be able to tell who the lead guitarist was if they couldn't see - it's not like Axl choose's to play with complete novices!

Incidently I've also seen Arcade Fire a few times, The Libertines 3 or 4 times and Blink twice. Out of those only Blink really disappointed, though I'm not convinced yet by Arcade Fire as a stadium band having first seen them at ULU.

Just approach it with an open mind - I've been going to gigs and festivals for 25+ years now and you always regret the bands you missed more than the crap shows you saw!

Dave

[mrtourette]

The point is, both bands essentially listened to the same music. Differing attitudes, personalities, locations, environment - they all play factors in the type of influence you receive. I know this from my own musical endeavours. Most good bands take bits and pieces of differing music styles and combine them to make an amalgamation or composite of music that sounds somewhat familiar but completely unique. Not crossover, mind you, just different.

If you look at the bands who influenced Nirvana, especially the more mainstream bands like Boston, Neil Young, The Beatles, Black Sabbath, AC/DC, etc - they're not poles apart from the bands that influenced Guns n Roses. So if go back in a timewarp to, say, 1985 or '86, take Guns n Roses out of LA, put them amongst the crowd of Melvins fans and devotees of Big Black and Sonic Youth, you'd probably end up with Nirvana's Nevermind instead of Appetite for Destruction anyway.

What happened with Nevermind was going to happen anyway, it was just a matter of time and place. Guns n Roses was 1987 in Los Angeles, Nirvana was 1991 in Seattle. Guns n Roses weren't that much different in attitude to Nirvana - Nirvana were just much better at conveying it to an audience of people who were begging to be understood and heard.

[Porcelina]

Epic post mate! That was my attitude towards the Pumpkins in 2007, when a few people were cynical about Billy Corgan The Tyrant playing with a bunch of "session musicians". When you love a band so much, and have loved them for years, sometimes since childhood, the opportunity to see them is too great to turn down just because it's not the original line-up. GNR aren't my favourite band of all time (though I do like them and they are one of my "must sees" this year) but I can imagine the excitement someone who is a diehard GNR fan must be buzzing with, at the prospect of seeing Axl Rose singing Welcome To The Jungle, Paradise City and Sweet Chilld O Mine in the flesh. Like I was when the Pumpkins were announced a few years ago.

Also, now you mention it, Happy Mondays and a (finally) reformed Stone Roses for 2011?

[zlatan07]

I quite like Arcade Fire and they are good live, but I'm unsure how they'll do as a headliner. Blink 182, a band for 12 year olds. Going by what I've seen of their performances last year, I have a feeling GNR will be the performance of the weekend.